International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction

Lewis, James R.

doi: 10.1080/10447318.2015.1065689pmid: N/A

This special issue focuses on the evolution of development and assessment methodologies related to usability and user experience. The five articles have a diverse range of topics, including comparison of moderated and unmoderated think-aloud usability sessions, a new usability inspection method based on concept mapping, analysis of the fitness of scrum (agile) and kanban (lean) development methodologies to incorporate user experience methodologies, exploration of the relation between expectations and user experience, and a case study describing difficulties encountered when assessing usability “in the wild.” These articles should prove to be of value to practitioners and researchers with an interest in the evolution of usability and user experience methodologies.

Hertzum, Morten; Borlund, Pia; Kristoffersen, Kristina B.

doi: 10.1080/10447318.2015.1065691pmid: N/A

The value of thinking aloud in usability tests depends on the content of the users’ verbalizations. We investigated moderated and unmoderated users’ verbalizations during relaxed thinking aloud (i.e., verbalization at Levels 1–3). Verbalizations of user experience were frequent and mostly relevant to the identification of usability issues. Explanations and redesign proposals were also mostly relevant, but infrequent. The relevance of verbalizations of user experience, explanations, and redesign proposals showed the value of relaxed thinking aloud but did not clarify the trade-off between rich verbalizations and test reactivity. Action descriptions and system observations—two verbalization categories consistent with both relaxed and classic thinking aloud—were frequent but mainly of low relevance. Across all verbalizations, the positive or negative verbalizations were more often relevant than those without valence. Finally, moderated and unmoderated users made largely similar verbalizations, the main difference being a higher percentage of high-relevance verbalizations by unmoderated users.

Bias, Randolph G.; Moon, Brian M.; Hoffman, Robert R.

doi: 10.1080/10447318.2015.1065692pmid: N/A

A key aspect of a website or any artifact is its usability—the ability of the artifact’s target audience to carry out tasks safely, effectively, efficiently, even joyfully. One class of usability evaluation methods is inspection methods, in which the usability professional systematically inspects the user interface to discern potential usability problems. Here the article proposes employing Concept Mapping, a proven method of knowledge elicitation and representation, as a new, structured usability inspection method. Nineteen students in a master’s-level usability class each generated a Concept Map (Cmap) of 1 of 5 websites. These Cmaps were shared with the sites’ webmasters, and the webmasters completed a questionnaire giving us feedback on the value of the Cmaps for subsequent site redesigns. The article presents those data, infers what improvements need to be made in the new Concept Mapping Usability Evaluation method, and invites others to join us in investigating the potential value of this method.

Law, Effie Lai-Chong; Lárusdóttir, Marta Kristín

doi: 10.1080/10447318.2015.1065693pmid: N/A

Two project management approaches, Agile and Lean, have increasingly been adopted in recent years for software development. Meanwhile, in the field of human–computer interaction (HCI), user experience (UX) has become central in research and practice. The new hybrids between the two fields—Agile UX and Lean UX—were born a few years ago. As Agile, Lean, and UX have different principles and practices, one can query whether the couplings are well justified and whether Agile or Lean is more compatible with UX work. We have conducted a conceptual analysis and tended to conclude that Lean instantiated as Kanban fits UX work better than Agile instantiated as Scrum. To explore further our claim, we performed a secondary data analysis of 10 semistructured interviews with practitioners working with Scrum and Kanban in different sectors (Study 1). This study enabled us to gain insights into the applications of the two processes in real-life cases, their strengths and weaknesses, and factors influencing the practicality of implementing them. Both processes seem not favorable for UX work in practice. Among others, one intriguing observation is loose adherence to the related guidelines and principles. A query derived from the analyses of the interviews is that “customer,” as compared with “user,” has more frequently been referred to by our interviewees, irrespective of the process they adopted. We have then been motivated to investigate this issue, using a web-based survey with another batch of practitioners (N = 73) in the software industry (Study 2). Results of the survey indicate that the practitioners in general had a reasonable understanding of the concepts “user” and “customer,” although a minority tended to treat them as synonyms. Limitations of the current studies and implications for future work are discussed.

Michalco, Jaroslav; Simonsen, Jakob Grue; Hornbæk, Kasper

doi: 10.1080/10447318.2015.1065696pmid: N/A

Before using an interactive product, people form expectations about what the experience of use will be like. These expectations may affect both the use of the product and users’ attitudes toward it. This article briefly reviews existing theories of expectations to design and perform two crowdsourced experiments that investigate how expectations affect user experience measures. In the experiments, participants saw a primed or neutral review of a simple online game, played it, and rated it on various user experience measures. Results suggest that when expectations are confirmed, users tend to assimilate their ratings with their expectations; conversely, if the product quality is inconsistent with expectations, users tend to contrast their ratings with expectations and give ratings correlated with the level of disconfirmation. Results also suggest that expectation disconfirmation can be used more widely in analyses of user experience, even when the analyses are not specifically concerned with expectation disconfirmation.

Lindgaard, Gitte

doi: 10.1080/10447318.2015.1065697pmid: N/A

This article describes one part of a human factors study conducted over 3 months in a petro-chemical manufacturing plant in Australia. The project had two purposes, namely, to identify issues to be included in a training course for plant operators and to identify low-level usability-related software issues that might be rectifiable prior to system implementation. After interviewing 28 operators and eight managers, the operators were observed on the job while interacting with the old system. Finally, the 3-part usability assessment comprising 2 expert inspections and a user-based quasi-walkthrough was conducted. As the study took place shortly before a new, off-the-shelf automated manufacturing system was implemented, it was not possible to test an interactive version, relying instead exclusively on static screens. This made it impossible to provide user performance data, which could have helped to convince management of the seriousness of certain problems. One of these proved so severe that an engineer had to be present 24/7 in the control room for 6 months following system cutover because the operators were unable to achieve the required product quality. Based on the data, suggestions are made for expanding the usability construct to include assessment of perceived technology usefulness and to refine the concept of attitude in mandatory settings.